This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Steve in Ottawa

Members
  • Content count

    225
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

1 Follower

About Steve in Ottawa

  • Rank
    Established Member
  • Birthday 20/07/55

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ottawa,, Ontario, Canada
  • Interests
    Spitfires, big time
    1/48 RCAF and CAF aircraft
    Commonwealth WW II
    Luftwaffe WW II
    Cdn Army vehicles
    NATO Air Forces
    Israeli Air Force

Recent Profile Visitors

1,088 profile views
  1. Really interesting to see that, Dave, thanks. It's a bit earlier than this discussion but still very interesting to see that this kind of thing did happen.
  2. This might be in B-scheme, but that's based solely on the pattern demarcation seen ahead of the roundel. I'm not sure if the tones near the exhaust represent paint or engine-related stains. Edit - Hmmmm, now this is getting more interesting. It's a poor image but it does look like this Mk.Vb is in the B-scheme pattern - http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/supermarine-spitfire-mk-vb-1941-the-iconic-british-second-world-war-picture-id463987573?s=612x612 as does this Turkish Mk.Vb Now I'm getting more convinced that B-scheme Spitfires were still fairly easy to find later in the war than I thought was possible:
  3. Hi Dave, Thanks for the translation of the M&S entry. I was reading that yesterday and nothing jumped out as being wing-swap worthy to me. What makes you think that the engine upgrade might have required a wing change? I suppose the 12-4-42 flying accident could have been the cause, too, but I don't know if a wing change could be done on-site by contractors.
  4. Hi OF, I think that should be further detailed to say that the alternating A and B scheme was abandoned in 1941. Manufacturers chose one or the other and could stick with using just one pattern for all their production. W3834 is a real mess when you compare it to the standard A-scheme pattern:
  5. Hi guys, great replies, thanks. What bothers me about my 'B-scheme wing in 1943' hypothesis is that they supposedly switched over to only the A-scheme very early in the Spitfire Mk.I production. But (almost) anything is possible, I suppose - I'm combing through photos to try and find any Mk.V's in B-scheme. I don't know enough about W3834's history to know if it ever had damage that might have required wing replacement at some point in its service.
  6. I'm down to painting a well-known 1943 401 Sqn Spitfire Vb, W3834, and I'm trying to sort out the odd camouflage pattern seen on this aircraft. As I was comparing known photos of this aircraft the wing camo pattern was confusing me, as the photos don't seem to match with what is considered 'normal' for an 'A-scheme', but the port wing camo makes more sense if it was 'B-pattern'. From what I can see of the of fuselage it very roughly matches up with 'A-scheme', with several significant pattern deviations from the standard. From what I can see in two photos of W3834 the port wing pattern appears to more closely conform to a B-pattern, but with some repainting to make the pattern better match up to the fuselage. So, the question is, for wartime repairs, were undamaged/repairable wings from one aircraft attached to another airframe that needed said wing? The other question considers the possibility of a Spitfire B-scheme paint pattern still in use in 1943?
  7. Peter, I've been following this build with great interest. Really fascinating and educational to see how you approach the various aspects of the model. Do you plan on having the in-progress work or the finished model at Telford this year? I'd love to see this in person; I'm not yet convinced that this really is only 1/18 scale!
  8. Hi Jun, Thanks for the images. Clearly (no pun intended) it appears that there were two styles of metal clipped wingtips - clear glass and coloured glass. Looking at the photos the coloured glass is, generally speaking, on the late-war/post-war aircraft. So for my model of a 1943-era Spitfire Vb I think I'll go with the clear glass and coloured bulbs. Great discussion and material sharing!
  9. Which photo is that, Bob? Do you have a URL for it, perchance? What you're saying about the standard wingtip makes sense to me. It would dumb to have a normal light bulb only in the wingtip. It would need the protection of a harder cover.
  10. Good info, Jun, thanks for posting it. I think we're all agreed that the initial version of the clipped wingtip was just plain wood, but by 1943 (the date of the photo of W3834 above) it looks like the clipped wingtip was like your second drawing, made of metal and with the aerodynamic light fairing in place. I'm still pondering whether the version used on W3834 is a clear lens with the standard wingtip's coloured lamp shining through it, or if the wartime clipped wingtip had a coloured lens. From what I think I see in the photo I'm now leaning towards it being a clear lens with a coloured light bulb inside it, but happy to discuss further. I'm also willing to entertain that a different/later version of the metal wingtip had red and green coloured lenses incorporated in their construction. Lots of fun to try and figure this stuff out.
  11. I've been Googling around looking for some ideas on clipped wing Spitfire Vb wingtip lights and came across this 2014 thread. I'm looking at this well-known 1943 photo of Spitfire Vb W3834, and it seems to pretty clearly show that there is an aerodynamic lens at the leading edge 'corner' of the wingtip. What I can't quite decide upon is whether this is a clear lens with a coloured bulb, or a coloured lens. Any thoughts on what the wartime trend was for Spitfires? I'm not keen on using any modern photos of restored aircraft as a guide.
  12. Hi Bob, thanks for the detailed info. I drilled out a nice-sized hole with a #61 bit and carefully filed it to what looks like a good size. Then I inserted a short section of 1 mm Abloy tubing and I'm quite pleased with the result. When the painting and washing is done I'll put a drop of something clear in there to represent the lens.
  13. Thanks, Bob. So is what I'm seeing inside the aperture the protective glass for the camera lens? I'm drilling this open on a 1/48 build and I'm not sure how to treat the final look of this feature. Here's another shot of an RCAF aircraft with the same setup as the photo above. I'm wondering what that tape patch is covering?
  14. On a later variant I would think that this was a fuel cooler intake, but I'm wondering if this a gun camera opening on a Mk.V? Depending on the photos I'm looking at, it's either open as you see below, visibly faired over with a metal plug, visibly taped over (with what looks like maybe a 0.303" MG tape patch?). In the photo below I have highlighted the opening in question, along with another tape-patched area to the right of the opening in the photo. This shows up on a few period photos, so it's not a one-off thing. Any educated insight would be appreciated.
  15. I don't think this has been mentioned, but the aircraft isn't carrying US HVAR's, but instead has British 25-lb AP RP's, right?